Ken was kind enough to start off the critical response to AoA's coverage of the Tribune's series on autism and quackery (post below this one). It should be an interesting day! Liz is keeping track of the coverage here. Orac weighed in with an excellent piece. So did LBRB. :-) I commented at the Trib piece, which had only garnered three comments, so I hope readers will go over and tell them well done.
AoA's pissed, of course, and has a piece out on how it's "another shoddy hit piece." See, there's the problem. They don't know good science. They don't know good science coverage. Come on, your wooquack docs didn't like the interview because it made them out to be the wooquacks they are?
Of course, Arranga (AoA author) has to frame these quacks as "the courageous doctors and researchers who are willing to move forward with integrity for the children despite mainstream pharMonied prejudice." Oh for heaven's sake, and the folks over there wonder why mainstream science doesn't take them seriously?
I'll confess, I just can't wade any deeper into the morass that is AoA today. It hurts. And I've better things to do.
It's nice to see the mainstream media cover this. It'd be even nicer to see it go big, to see the Geiers, Wakefield, and others really held up to mass exposure. It's a heck of a start, though.
Ken picks up and continues the examination of the Tribune articles at Autism News Beat.